Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Science & Engineering A

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/msea

The effect of pulse current changes in PCGTAW on microstructural

evolution, drastic improvement in mechanical properties, and fracture
mode of dissimilar welded joint of AISI 316L-AISI 310S stainless steels
M. Sabzi a, **, S.H. Mousavi Anijdan b, *, A.R. Eivani c, N. Park d, e, H.R. Jafarian c
a
Young Researchers and Elite Club, Dezful Branch, Islamic Azad University, Dezful, Iran
b
Department of Materials Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
c
School of Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST), Tehran, Iran
d
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-ro, Gyeongsan, Gyeongsangbuk-do, 38541, Republic of Korea
e
Institute of Materials Technology, Yeungnam University, 280 Daehak-ro, Gyeongbuk, 38541, Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper, the effect of pulse current changes in the Pulsed Current Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (PCGTAW) on
Austenitic stainless steels the various properties of dissimilar welding of AISI 316L-AISI 310S stainless steels was investigated. 10 mm
PCGTAW process thickness steel sheets were joined by the PCGTAW process with the background current (Ib) of 55, 70 and 85A, as
Microstructural evolution
well as the peak current (Ip) of 110, 130 and 150A. Then, optical microscopy (OM) and Field Emission Scanning
Mechanical properties
Electron Microscopy (FE-SEM) techniques were used to study the microstructural evolution in different areas of
Fracture mode
Weld joint of dissimilar the welded joints. Also, tensile, Charpy impact and Vickers microhardness tests were used to evaluate the effect
of the pulsed current changes on mechanical properties. Finally, the fracture surfaces of Charpy impact and
tensile tests samples were studied by FE-SEM. The weld metal (WM) microstructure consisted of austenite
dendrites together with a low amount of delta ferrite in the grain-boundaries. Results also showed that by
increasing Ib and decreasing Ip, the microstructure of the WM was changed from columnar dendritic to coaxial,
and a very fine, dendritic one. This condition led to the reduction of the size of the dendrites and the amount of
delta ferrite ingrain boundaries of the WM, as well as a reduction in the width of Unmixed Zone (UMZ) area.
Moreover, all the welded joints were fractured from the AISI 316L stainless steels side. However, the results of
the Charpy impact and microhardness tests showed that with the above variation in the welding parameters,
hardness value and fracture energy of the WM increased significantly. Fractography of the surfaces showed a
completely ductile fracture for both tensile and Charpy impact tests samples.

1. Introduction industrial/medical engineering applications. Austenitic stainless steels

Austenitic stainless steels are the most widely, and significantly the
largest, group of stainless steels used in industries. Among these steels,
316L austenitic stainless steel is specifically used due to its engineering
properties such as good weldability, proper pitting corrosion resistance,
acceptable performance in high temperature, and low-temperature
oxidation resistance. In sum, austenitic alloys are highly regarded in
strategic and important engineering applications [1,2]. In fact, austen­
itic stainless steels have attracted considerable attention in various in­
dustries due to their combination of various properties [3,4]. However,
the low wear resistance of these stainless steels has limited their use in
do not show phase transformation after exposure at high temperatures,
during controlled cooling and quenching. For this reason, by designing a
suitable heat treatment or welding procedure, the austenite grain size
can be controlled. Although static and dynamic recrystallization have
been used for grain refinement of the structure of austenitic stainless
steels, none of these phenomena is more effective in refining the struc­
ture than severe plastic deformation [5,6]. These steels are also widely
used in oil, gas, petrochemical and even nuclear industries due to their
stability in acidic environments, good sulfide stress corrosion (SSC)
resistance and exceptional passive layer formation in highly corrosive
environments [7,8]. Commonly, the strength of these austenitic stainless

* Corresponding author.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mas.metallurg88@gmail.com (M. Sabzi), hashemmousavi@gmail.com, hashemmousavi@srbiau.ac.ir (S.H. Mousavi Anijdan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2021.141700
Received 12 June 2021; Received in revised form 2 July 2021; Accepted 3 July 2021
Available online 4 July 2021
0921-5093/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
M. Sabzi et al.
steels are equal to low alloy steels (with ferrite structure).
Dissimilar joining of austenitic stainless steels with other alloys or
metals is extensively used in the nuclear, military, naval, and pressure
vessels industries. The main application of these welding joints is where
a transfer of mechanical properties or high efficiency during service is
required. 316L austenitic stainless steel is often used in power plants for
the pipe sections containing hot vapors. However, the low carbon and
low-alloy steels, or microalloying steel are used below a certain tem­
perature and pressure range to reduce the cost [9,10]. On the other
hand, 310S austenitic stainless steel is used at high temperatures due to
its high nickel and chromium content. 310S steel is used in applications
where there are multiple and intermittent cooling/heating sequences
since the passive precipitate layer forms a very sticky coating on its
surface [11,12].
Nowadays, the widespread use of gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW)
is due to its high-quality welding, providing lower distortion than other
welding methods, precise control over the amount of heat generated and
heat input. In a sense, the amount of heat input in this method is lower
than other melting methods such as Shielded Metal Arc Welding
(SMAW) and Submerged Arc Welding (SAW). As well, economic con­
siderations, the ability to join dissimilar alloys and thus achieving more
suitable mechanical properties are other attributes of the GTAW over
other melting methods. Moreover, AC alternating current GTAW process
creates a stable arc current in the welding pool. It also provides arc
stability. This process is used to reduce distortion and increase me­
chanical properties due to its ability to concentrate heat [13–16]. The
GTAW process with the Pulsed Current Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
(PCGTAW) is advantageous over AC GTAW due to the vibration that it
generates in the molten pool during the welding process. As a result of
such a vibration, the structure of the weld metal is fine-grained and the
width of the heat-affected zone (HAZ) is reduced. The welding current
changes rapidly from a maximum value in the peak current (Ip) to a
minimum value in the background current (Ib) for the pulsed GTAW
process. This is occurring in a way that during the Ip period melting
occurs, and then during the Ib period solidification occurs. In fact, Ip
controls the size of the secondary phases or the precipitates. It also
controls the grains or dendrites size [17,18].
Several studies were conducted regarding the use of GTAW and
PCGTAW methods to joint dissimilar steels in terms of the comparison of
pulsed, continuous and alternating currents and their influence on the
mechanical properties of the welded joints [19–21]. In that sense,
Devendranath Ramkumar et al. [22] investigated the effect of the type of
filler metal, as well as pulsed and continuous currents on the micro­
structural changes and mechanical properties of the dissimilar joint of
316L stainless steel to Inconel 718. They showed that when employing
the ER2553 filler, the use of the pulsed current leads to improved tensile
strength of the joint compared to the direct current. As well, Deven­
dranath Ramkumar et al. [23] investigated the effect of the type of filler
metal in the PCGTAW process on the mechanical properties of AISI 430
stainless steel connected to Inconel 718 prepared. Their results showed
that compared to the ER2553 filler, the use of ERNiCrMo-4 filler metal
leads to improved tensile strength of the joints. Also, in the tensile test,
all samples failed on the AISI 430 stainless steel side. In another study,
Advaith et al. [24] investigated the effect of the current type in the
GTAW process on the microstructure and mechanical properties of the
dissimilar joint of C-22 alloy and AISI 316L steel. Their results indicated
that the weld joint prepared by the PCGTAW process has a much higher
strength level compared with the weld joint prepared by the A-GTAW
process. Therefore, it is safe to state that changing the welding param­
eters would affect all the metallurgical properties of engineering com­
ponents, hence the need to properly select and optimize the welding
parameters [25,26].
Moreover, in research conducted by Arivarasu et al. [16], the effect
of pulsed and continues currents in the GTAW process on the mechanical
properties of the welded joint of AISI 4340-AISI 304L was assessed.
Their results showed that using pulsed current leads to enhanced
2
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
strength and hardness of the welded joint. In another research per­
formed by Sharma et al. [21], the effect of pulsed and continues current
in the GTAW process on the microstructural evolution and mechanical
properties of the dissimilar joint of Hastelloy C-276/AISI 321 were
assessed. They reported that compared to the continues current, using
the pulsed current led to a reduced dendrite size and enhanced me­
chanical properties of the WM. In that regard, Karunakaran [27]
investigated the mentioned parameters of the GTAW process on the
mechanical properties of the welded 304L stainless steel. Their results
indicated that the pulsed current leads to the improvement of the tensile
properties of the welded joint. Devendranath Ramkumar et al. [28]
investigated the effect of these two currents on the welded joints of 904L
super austenitic stainless steel and showed that the pulsed current en­
hances the strength/hardness of the joints compared with the continues
current.
As explained above, welding of austenitic stainless steels to each
other is inevitable in various industries. On the other hand, the use of the
PCGTAW technique has a very positive effect on microstructure modi­
fication and mechanical properties enhancement in dissimilar joints. Of
the most challenging aspect of using the PCGTAW process for the
welding of austenitic stainless steels that has not been paid attention to
is the possibility of changing the matrix current (Ib) and the peak current
(Ip). However, there is no comprehensive understanding of the effect of
pulsed current changes in the PCGTAW process on the microstructure
evolution, mechanical properties, and fracture mode of dissimilar
welding joint of AISI 316L-AISI 310S stainless steels. Therefore, this
study was envisioned to investigate the microstructural evolution and
mechanical properties improvement of the welding joint of stainless
steels AISI 316L-AISI 310S through changing the pulsed current in the
PCGTAW process.
2. Materials and experimental
Sheets of 310S and 316L austenitic stainless steels with a thickness of
10 mm were used as the base metals (BM). Also, ER309L with a diameter
of 2.4 mm was used as the filler metal. For this purpose, first, the sheets
were cut to the dimensions of 100 mm × 100 mm × 10 mm. Then, the
chemical composition of the filler and the BMs were controlled using a
Spark Emission Spectrometer, made in Germany. The results of this
analysis are given in Table 1.It is important to mention that the ASTM
E1086-14 standard was used for the chemical analyses of the BM, the
WM and the filler metal using Spark Atomic Emission Spectrometry.
To prepare the joint design, samples from both austenitic stainless
steels of 310S and 316L were first cut by a wire-cut machine into the
dimensions of 100 mm × 100 mm × 10 mm. Then, one side of the steel
sheets was machined by a milling machine to the butt joint with a V-
shaped groove. The bevel angle of each sheet to the center of the welding
line was 30◦ . Thus, the total bevel angle for both sheets was 60◦ . It
should be mentioned that the joint design was prepared in such a way
that the welding line was perpendicular to the direction of the sheets
rolling. As well, in the joint design, the distance (width) of the root pass
(Gap) was 2 mm, and its height (Root) was 1 mm. The final thickness of
the joint (together with WM) was about 12 mm. A schematic of the joint
designed in this research is shown in Fig. 1.
In the next step, to remove oxide layers and surface contamination
(according to Fig. 1), this area of the joint was degreased with acetone
and then dried. Welding of the designed scheme was performed by the
PCGTAW process without applying preheating and with argon shielding
gas as well as negative polarity. Welding was done using ER309L as filler
metal and in 5 passes (one root pass and 4 passes to fill the molten pool).
A Tungsten electrode containing 2% Thorium with a diameter of 2.4 mm
was used. Argon gas with a purity of 99.99%, flow rate of 16 L/min and
back protection flow rate of 14 L/min was employed to protect the weld
pool. To prevent distortion created from rapid cooling and shrinkage of
the WM, the interpass temperature was taken as 120 ◦ C. The welding
parameters used in this study are reported in Table 2. It should be noted
M. Sabzi et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700

Table 1
The chemical composition of the BMs and the filler metal used in this research (wt.%).
Materials Elements (wt.%)

Cr Ni Mn Si Cu N Ti Mo Nb C Fe

316L BM 16.34 13.91 1.94 0.63 – 0.02 0.01 2.51 0.01 0.02 Balance
310S BM 24.26 21.89 1.93 0.98 0.27 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.02 0.05 Balance
ER 309L Filler 23.12 13.92 2.45 0.35 0.19 0.02 – 0.36 0.01 0.02 Balance

Moreover, tensile, Charpy impact and Vickers microhardness tests

were done to evaluate the effect of pulsed current changes on mechan­
ical properties. Samples for the tensile testing were prepared following
the ASTM E8 standard. Tensile tests were done by a Universal device
model TB75Twith the nominal strain rate of 10− 2 s− 1 at 24 ± 1 ◦ C
temperature. Also, the samples required to evaluate the fracture energy
in the Charpy impact test were prepared according to the ASTM E23
standard. Samples for the latest test were wire-cut to the dimensions
of 55 mm × 10 mm × 10 mm. The Charpy impact tests were performed
using SANTAM® equipment model SIT-200B at room temperature. The
dimensions of the samples prepared for the tensile and Charpy impact
tests are shown in Fig. 2.
Vickers microhardness test was done to measure the microhardness
of different areas of the weld and to obtain the hardness profile of the
Fig. 1. Schematic of the joint design of this research for the welding of 310S welded joints. An applied load of 100 gr for about 20 s was employed at
and 316L austenitic stainless steels. ambient temperature. The microhardness tests were done based on the
ASTM E384 standard. It should be noted that to ensure the repeatability
of the results, all mechanical tests were repeated three times. Finally, an
Table 2
FE-SEM was used to study the fracture surfaces after the Charpy impact
The PCGTAW process parameters used in this research.
tests and the tensile tests.
Sample Code Ib (A) Ip (A) On time (%)

A 55 150 50
B 70 130 50
C 85 110 50

that the welding parameters were selected in a way to prevent heat input
into the welding joint and to create a suitable fluidity. I was also aimed
at creating proper permeability for mixing the BMs of austenitic stainless
steels and the filler metal.
Chromium and Nickel equivalents were calculated at the end of the
welding process to predict the solidification of the WM. They were
calculated as follows [29]:

Creq = %Cr + %Mn + (1.5 × %Si) + (0.5 × %Nb) (1)

Nieq = %Ni + (0.5 × %Mn) + (30 × %C) (2)

As well, to define the amount of ferrite in the WM, a Feritscope

equipment model FERITSCOPE® FMP30 made by Fischer Technology
Inc., Germany, was used. It is important to mention that to minimize the
error in measuring the amount of ferrite in the WM by the Feritscope,
tests were done from 10 points of the last welding pass. The average of
these 10 points was reported as the amount of ferrite in the WM.
To study the microstructure of the welded joints, a cross-section
sample of the weld, from each welded joint, was cut. Such a sample
included the weld metal zone (WM), unmixed zone (UMZ) and the base
metal (BM). Then, the polished surfaces of the samples were obtained by
silicon carbide sandpapers numbers from 400 to 1500 and in a wet
medium. The final polishing operation was done using an alumina so­
lution with a particle size of 0.2 μm. Samples were finally etched with a
Marble solution (50 mL Hydrochloric acid + 10gr CuSO4 + 50 mL
Water) for ~23 s to examine the microstructure of all three regions of
BM, UMZ and WM. Important to mention that the microstructural
preparation was done based on ASTM E3 standard procedure. An
Olympus model optical microscope made in Japan and a Field Emission
Scanning Electron Microscopy (FE-SEM) model MIRA3TESCAN-XMU
were used to study the microstructure of different areas of the welded Fig. 2. The dimensions of the samples prepared for: a) Tensile test, b) Charpy
joints. impact test.

3
M. Sabzi et al.
3. Results
3.1. Microstructural observations
In this section, all three parts of the welded joints prepared in this
research are examined by optical microscopy (OM) and FE-SEM. Fig. 3
shows the BM images of the 316L stainless steel and the 310S austenitic
stainless steel obtained by optical microscopy and FE-SEM. As can be
clearly seen from Fig. 3, the microstructure of both cases contains co­
axial austenite grains together with delta ferrite strings. Besides, as the
cases were used in the annealed condition, annealing twins are
observable in the micrographs.
Also, Fig. 4 shows the optical microscope and FE-SEM images of the
microstructure of the WM created with the lowest Ib and the highest Ip.
As can be seen in Fig. 4, the microstructure of the WM is predominantly
austenitic with a very small amount of delta ferrite scattered in the
austenite grain boundaries and between the dendritic branches. As well,
it can be understood from the formation of austenite and delta ferrite
that the solidification mode of the WM was in the form of austenitic-
ferritic (AF). For more detail investigation of this point, the amount of
ferrite in the WM was measured by a Feritscope and the result is reported
in Table 3. The values of Nieq and Creq, calculated by equations (1) and
(2), are reported in Table 3. These values were 16.1 ± 0.6% and 23.5 ±
0.5%, respectively. Moreover, it can be predicted, using the Schaeffler
Fig. 3. Optical microscopy and FE-SEM micrographs: a, b) 316L austenitic stainless steel, c, d) 310S austenitic stainless steel.
4
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
diagram, that the solidification mode was austenitic-ferritic and the
amount of ferrite that is formed in the WM is in the range of 4–9%.
Fig. 5 shows an FE-SEM micrograph of the Solidification Subgrain
Boundary (SSGB) formed in the austenitic WM. As well, Fig. 5 shows an
example of the formation of the Solidification Grain Boundary (SGB) in
the austenitic WM. It should be noted that SGBs are generated and
observed at the intersection of groups or packets of austenite sub-grains
in the microstructure of the WM. Further evaluation of the grain
boundaries formed in the WM of Fig. 5 reveals that the Migrated Grain
Boundary (MGB) is also formed in this austenitic WM.
The effect of pulsed current variation during the PCGTAW process on
the microstructural development of the WM of the dissimilar joint of
AISI 310S-AISI 316L stainless steels is shown in Fig. 6. The images
shown in Fig. 6 illustrate a completely austenitic matrix with small
amounts of delta ferrite scattered within the dendrite branches. In other
words, these images indicate that austenite is the predominant phase
that is formed in the WM. These micrographs also show that the
microstructure of the WM transformed from a columnar dendritic
feature to a very fine, and coaxial, dendritic one by increasing Ib and
decreasing Ip. As well, increasing Ib and decreasing Ip reduced the den­
dritic size and delta ferrite grain boundaries in the austenitic WM.
The FE-SEM micrographs of the interface of the WM with the BM for
both the AISI 310S and AISI 316L stainless steels are shown in Fig. 7. As
can be clearly seen in Fig. 7, the WM joint is very well connected to the
M. Sabzi et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700

Fig. 4. Microstructure of the WM by a) optical microscope image, b) FE-SEM micrograph.

change of the pulse current during the PCGTAW process.

Table 3
The values obtained for ferrite, Nieq, Creq.
Parameter Creq Nieq Ferrite in WM (%)
3.2. Mechanical properties

Value 23.5 ± 0.5 16.1 ± 0.6 7.1 ± 0.8

Fig. 5. FE-SEM micrograph of the grain boundaries formed in the austen­
itic WM.
BM of both austenitic structures. No voids, cracks or even discontinuities
are observable at the interface of these PCGTAW welded joints. The
microstructure of both cases indicates that the solidification of the WM
near the melt boundary is columnar dendrites, extended towards the
center of the WM. In some areas, especially close to the interface, several
dendrites are arranged in specific orientations. However, looking at all
the interfaces, it can be deduced that a UMZ region is formed at the
interface of the WM with both the BMs. Generally, considering the
interface microstructures, it is evident that the width of the UMZ region
was reduced by increasing Ib and decreasing Ip as well as the continuous
Fig. 8 provides the results of tensile, Charpy impact and micro­
hardness tests. The stress-strain curves obtained from the uniaxial ten­
sile test are shown in Fig. 8a, where mechanical parameters such as
tensile strength and yield strength of the welded joints for AISI 310S -
AISI 316Lstainless steels can be attained. As can be seen in this curve, all
three tested specimens for different conditions of the PCGTAW process
show yield strength in the range of 183–203 MPa and tensile strength in
the range of 476–495 MPa (Table 4). It is also important to mention that
the welded joints were broken on the 316L stainless steel side for all
three cases. Moreover, Fig. 8b shows the results of horizontal micro­
hardness (hardness profile) from the BM of the 316L stainless steel to the
WM, and then from the WM to the BM of the 310S stainless steel under
different welding conditions. As can be observed in the hardness profile
of all welded joints of Fig. 8b, the values of the microhardness from the
BMs to the austenitic WM show an upward trend. Looking at these
hardness profiles, it can be inferred that the value of microhardness is in
the range of 170–185 HV for the BM of the 316Lstainless steel (Table 4).
This value is in the range of 205–227 HV for the BM of the 310S stainless
steel (Table 4). However, as the profile approaches the center of the
austenitic WM, microhardness increases substantially for about 265–324
HV (Table 4). As well, comparing the hardness profile of all three cases,
it can be seen that the hardness of the WM was increased with increasing
Ib and decreasing Ip. Moreover, Fig. 8c shows the results of the Charpy
impact test for the dissimilar joint of AISI 310S - AISI 316L stainless
steels. Similar to what was observed in the microhardness results, the
fracture energy of the WM of the welded joints increased with increasing
Ib and decreasing Ip. Additionally, it is worth mentioning that the values
reported for the tensile, hardness and Charpy impact tests are the
average of the three tests conducted in each case.
3.3. Fractography
Fractography was performed on the fracture surfaces of the tensile
and Charpy impact tests samples. The results of this study are shown in
Figs. 9 and 10. In the case of the tensile test samples, the fracture surface
of a welded joints was examined by FE-SEM, only on the side of the 316L
stainless steel. This was due to the fact that the 316L stainless steel side
was broken during the tensile tests. However, the fracture surfaces of all
three Charpy impact test samples were assessed by the FE-SEM

5
M. Sabzi et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700

technique. It is clear from the fracture surfaces that in the both tensile
test and the Charpy impact test, the welded joints show ductile fracture
with a dimple characteristic.

4. Discussion

As was observed in the microstructures of Fig. 3, the BMs structure

Fig. 6. FE-SEM micrographs of the microstructure of the WM for the welded
joints under various pulsed current conditions: a) Ib = 55A, Ip = 150A, b) Ib =
70A, Ip = 130A, c) Ib = 85A, Ip = 110A.
for these cases consisted of austenite grains together with strings of delta
ferrite. Generally, stainless steels can be welded under either annealed
or hardened conditions. Annealed condition is preferred for welding
when the welded steel is prone to crack initiated from its partial melting
zone or Heat Affected Zone (HAZ). In fact, this advantage is due to the
absence of precipitates such as chromium, titanium and niobium car­
bides (or carbonitrides). Under this scenario, the formation of fusion
cracks will be countenanced. As can be observed in the optical micro­
scopy and FE-SEM images of Fig. 3, the microstructures of both stainless
steels consist of fine and coaxial austenite grains. As these alloys are
produced by the hot rolling process, to remove precipitates and any type
of irregularities created in the structure during hot rolling, they are
subjected to annealing heat treatment. Also, in the BM microstructure of
both cases, the delta ferrite phase can be observed in the form of long
strings stretched in the rolling direction within the matrix. This type of
ferrite usually forms due to the separation of ferrite forming elements
such as molybdenum and chromium during the thermo-mechanical
processes [30–32]. However, under the annealed condition, the delta
ferrite has no adverse effect on stainless steels. On the other hand, the
development of this delta ferrite in the austenite grain boundaries en­
hances the formation of various carbides and even the sigma phase. Both
carbides and sigma phases are brittle features in the austenitic stainless
steels. The BMs of both cases were rolled and annealed. Due to such an
annealing heat treatment, twins can be observed in some austenite
grains. It should be noted that twins would also be formed during the hot
rolling process, prior to the annealing heat treatment, though with a
completely different characteristic [33–35].
The microstructures of the WM (Fig. 4) for the welded joints clearly
show austenite dendrites together with a small amount of delta ferrite.
This is indicative of the occurrence of austenitic-ferritic (AF) solidifi­
cation mode for the WM. Due to the dilution of the WM by the BM and
the increased amount of ferrite stabilizing elements such as molybde­
num and chromium in WM, these elements accumulate in the SSGB
between the dendrite arm spacing at the end of solidification [36,37].
Then, a small amount of delta ferrite is formed between the dendrite
arms spacing as a result of the eutectic reaction. The formation of this
delta ferrite changes the solidification mode of the WM from Austenitic
(A) to Austenitic-Ferritic (AF) [37,38]. On the other hand, the presence
of austenite stabilizing elements such as nickel, carbon and manganese
in the chemical composition of the ER309L filler metal leads to a
completely austenitic microstructure at the end of solidification. How­
ever, dilution of the WM by both the BMs reduces the amount of carbon,
nickel, manganese and copper, leading to the reduction of austenite in
the WM. The amount of ferrite in the WM would also increase in this
situation. For these reasons, an austenitic matrix together with delta
ferrite is discernible (in both the optical microscopy and FE-SEM images
of Fig. 4) in the microstructure of the WM.
The metallurgical understanding of the shape, solidification orien­
tation, and nature of the grain boundaries formed in the WM, as a result
of the austenitic or austenitic-ferrite solidification mode, is of great
importance. This is because many welding defects such as melting
cracks, solidification cracks, cavities, voids etc., are highly associated
with the formation of grain boundaries in the WM. Moreover, many of
the damages that occur during the service of the welded joints are
related to these grain boundaries. Three types of grain boundaries were
detected in the WM study of the welded joints in this study. Fig. 5 shows
the three types of MCB, SSGB and SGB grain boundaries formed in the
WM. These grain boundaries are discussed in greater details here.
Solidification subgrains in the microstructure of the WM are one of

6
M. Sabzi et al.
Fig. 7. FE-SEM micrographs of the interface of the WM with both the BMs for the welded joint under different pulse current conditions during the PCGTAW process:
a, b) Ib = 55A,Ip = 150A, c, d) Ib = 70A,Ip = 130A, e, f) Ib = 85A,Ip = 110A.
the most delicate features to be observed with electron or optical mi­
croscopes. In Fig. 4a, the austenite grains are clearly visible as cells or
dendrites that are formed in the austenitic WM. The separating bound­
ary between the austenite sub-grains glued together is known as SSGB in
the WM. Since SSGBs have a different chemical composition and
orientation than the main grain boundaries, they are well established in
the microstructure. The development of this low angle misorientation is
due to the growth of the sub-grains in the WM during the solidification
and the preferred crystallographic directions. For the austenitic WM,
such a direction is <100>. Thus, it can be stated that the dislocations
density in the direction of the SSGBs is relatively low. This is due to the
7
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
absence of structural misorientation in the direction of the SSGBs to
block the moving dislocations [38,39].
On the other hand, SGBs are the immediate result of competitive
growth in the austenitic WM. They form during the solidification of the
weld pool and along its trailing edge. Moreover, since each of these sub-
grain packages in the microstructure of austenitic WM has a different
growth direction, their intersection will usually lead to the formation of
a boundary with a high angle misorientation. Therefore, these solidifi­
cation boundaries are called High-Angle Grain Boundaries (HAGBs).
Studies showed that very thin layers with low melting temperature, as
well as the WM solidification cracks, usually form in the direction of
M. Sabzi et al.
Fig. 8. Results of the mechanical tests: a) Tensile, b) Microhardness, c) Charpy impact.
SGBs in stainless steels, particularly in the austenitic stainless steels [39,
40].
As grain boundary migration reduces the energy of the newly formed
grain boundaries, the formation of MGBs does not require much of a
driving force. Also, the driving force required for the grain boundary
migration in the austenitic WM is the result of the reduction of the grain
boundary energy. However, grain boundary migration usually occurs
due to the reheating of the WM resulting from the variation of the
8
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
welding pass during the multi-pass welding. The migrating grain
boundaries are formed in the microstructure of the WM with a large
difference from the original grain boundaries. They would reduce the
overall energy of the system. Segregation of alloying elements along the
migrating grain boundaries can contribute to other segregation pro­
duced in the microstructure of the WM. In a sense, the formation of
MGBs in the austenitic WM is more likely with an austenitic solidifica­
tion mode [40,41].
M. Sabzi et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700

Table 4
Average values of the mechanical properties together with their standard de­
viation obtained from tensile, hardness and Charpy impact tests.
Parameter Yield Tensile Elongation Microhardness Impact
Strength Strength at Break (HV) energy
(MPa) (MPa) (%) (J)
Average value
for WM

Sample A 195 ± 8 485 ± 9 41 ± 1 270 ± 5 153 ± 4

Sample B 192 ± 9 484 ± 8 40 ± 2 294 ± 7 176 ± 4
Sample C 194 ± 9 486 ± 9 40 ± 1 318 ± 6 198 ± 3

Fig. 6 shows a microstructure of the WM of the welded joints of this

research. It was observed in this figure that with increasing Ib and
decreasing Ip, the shape of the dendrites was transformed from columnar
to the coaxed one. As such, the size of the dendrites and the delta ferrite
were decreased in this condition. As was observed in the microstructure
of the WM, the WM solidification mode in the dissimilar welding joint of
AISI 310S-AISI 316L stainless steels is austenitic-ferritic in nature.
Therefore, if the solidification rate increases, as the molten pool tem­
perature decreases, the cooling of the welding pool melt accelerates due
to the increased convective heat transfer. Consequently, there is less
opportunity to convert austenite to ferrite in the austenitic WM.
Therefore, by increasing Ib and decreasing Ip, which leads to an
increased convective heat transfer from the weld pool, the probability of
transforming austenite to ferrite decreases in the WM. As previously
described, the melting sequence occurs during the Ip period and then the
solidification sequence occurs during the Ib period of the PCGTAW
process. Therefore, the lower the Ip and the higher the Ib, the lower the
amount of melt produced in the weld pool, and the higher the solidifi­
cation time. Generally, very fine and coaxial dendrites would form in
case the preferred places for the nucleation of primary dendrites in­
crease in the molten pool. When a pulsed current is applied to the molten
pool of the weld, the amount of current intensity is changes. As a result,
the molten pool constantly vibrates and experiences alternating cycles of
melting and solidification. In fact, two phenomena occur with the con­
stant change of Ip and Ib. First of all, by applying a pulsed current to the
weld pool, the primary dendrite arms that were formed in the weld pool,
are broken. Secondly, the rate of the convective heat transfer from the
weld pool increases with increasing Ib and decreasing Ip. In other words,
by increasing Ib and decreasing Ip, the weld pool solidifies at a higher
cooling rate, which prevents the growth of the primary dendrites. On the
other hand, the presence of the broken arms of the dendrites in the weld
pool can act as the preferred nucleation sites, hence for a substantial
increment of the heterogeneous nucleation rate in the weld pool. As a
result, the welded joint with the condition of Ib = 55A, Ip = 150A con­
tains a columnar structure with elongated dendrites compared to the
welded joint with the condition of Ib = 85A, Ip = 110A.
Two parameters of the thermal gradient (G) and growth rate (R) are
the most important solidification parameters. The ratio of G/R is often
used to predict the morphology and the solidification microstructure
[42]. Increasing Ib and reducing Ip leads to increased thermal convection
in the weld pool. As a result, increasing the Ib and reducing Ip led to the
reduction of the thermal gradient, causing a reduction of the G/R. An
equiaxed dendritic microstructure is obtained in the WM due to the
above development. The thermal gradient increases with reducing Ib
and increasing Ip, leading to an increased G/R, which develops the
columnar dendritic structure in the WM. On the other hand, the thermal
gradient and solidification rate influence the size of the dendrites and
the distance between the dendrites arms spacing as well. Considering
this point, with increasing Ib and reducing Ip, the solidification rate was
increased in the PCGTAW process. As a result, more refined coaxial
Fig. 9. FE-SEM micrographs of the fracture surface after the tensile test: a)
solidification dendrites were obtained.
Ductile fracture (with dimple characteristic), b) Cavity connection stage, c)
In a sense, a higher degree of oscillation is attained during the so­
Final rupture stage.
lidification of the weld pool due to the increased Ib, decreased Ip, and the
continuous change of the pulsed current of the PCGTAW process.

9
M. Sabzi et al. Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700

Subsequently, this phenomenon leads to the breaking of the arms and

Fig. 10. FE-SEM micrographs of the fracture surface after the Charpy impact
test under the conditions of: a) Ib = 55A, Ip = 150A, b) Ib = 70A,Ip = 130A, c) Ib
= 85A,Ip = 110A.
the tips of the columnar dendrites grow in the melt pool close to the weld
line. In other words, by doing so, the melt penetrates the empty spaces
between the dendrites arms. This leads to an increased convective heat
transfer and lowers the temperature of the weld pool. The result is an
increased solidification rate and a structure with very fine and coaxial
dendrites. It should be noted that many white points and very small
holes are commonly observed in almost all the micrographs presented in
this manuscript. These features are related to the polishing and etching
stage.
Additionally, it was observed in the interface images of the welded
joints of Fig. 7 that a UMZ is formed. This is due to the fact that part of
both the BMs, close to and in contact with, the weld pool was melted due
to the very high temperature that the weld pool experienced. However,
it solidifies again without mixing with the melt of the filler metal. In
other words, the UMZ region is a boundary layer of the austenitic BM
that is close to the melting line. This boundary layer melts during the
PCGTAW process and solidifies after the last pass of the process without
significant mixing with the filler metal [43–45]. Usually, the onset of the
UMZ solidification occurs from the partial melting zone at the welded
joint and then extends along the melting line towards the center of the
weld line. In that sense, it can be said that both of the BMs melted at the
interface, but the UMZ region was formed due to the non-mixing of the
melted region. It is clear from the microstructural images shown in Fig. 7
that the width of the UMZ region is not the same throughout the inter­
face. In a way, it can be stated that the spread of the UMZ region is a
function of the amount of convective heat transfer at the interface of the
welded joints. Therefore, in the welded joints with high heat convective
flow, the width of the UMZ area is low. It should be noted, however, that
the formation of the UMZ is more common in dissimilar joints of
stainless steels (especially austenitic stainless steels). The formation of
the UMZ could also be due to the difference in the melting point of the
BMs and the filler metal. On the other hand, improper mixing occurs at
the interface close to the weld pool. It is worth mentioning that the
formation of the UMZ in dissimilar joints of the austenitic stainless steels
can increase the likelihood of hot cracking. Overall, it is evident from the
microstructural images that increasing Ib and decreasing of Ip together
with the continuous change of the pulsed current in the PCGTAW pro­
cess led to the UMZ width reduction. This is due to the vibrations applied
to the freezing melt of the weld pool. A better mixing is obtained as both
the vibration and the turbulence increase. Additionally, the broken
dendritic arms facilitate the penetration of the melt.
As observed in Fig. 8a, the stress-strain curves showed that the
welded joints of this study contain yield strength in the range of
183–203 MPa and tensile strength in the range of 476–495 MPa. As well,
all the welded joints were broken from the BM of the 316L austenitic
stainless steel. The ductility of all three joints was about 40 ± 2%, which
is matched with the ductility of the 316L stainless steel. The results
suggest that the strength of the WM of joints is greater than that of the
BMs of the austenitic stainless steels. This is related to the very small
dendrites size formed in the WM. Moreover, since all the welded joints
failed at the BMs during the tensile test, it is noticeable that the strength
of the WM and the UMZ is acceptable. And, no metallurgical defects
(such as smelt cracking, distortion, etc.) were formed in these areas. In
fact, the BM of the austenitic 316L stainless steel is the weakest point in
the dissimilar welded joints of AISI 310S - AISI 316L stainless steels
made by the PCGTAW process. Generally, the weakest part of the joint
during the tensile test of dissimilar welded joints is the region that
surrenders faster than other zones [46,47].
Several studies showed that austenitic stainless steels are usually
welded before the heat treatment (mostly annealed) process. In rare
cases, they are firstly cold-worked or even hot rolled before the welding
process (depending on the required final joint). Under such circum­
stances, grain growth would occur due to hot rolling, or recrystallization
would occur due to the cold work. The grain growth can eventually lead
to the softening phenomenon at the interface or in the HAZ region.

10
M. Sabzi et al.
Therefore, the welded joint possibly breaks from the interface or the
HAZ during the tensile test. Consequently, there was no likelihood of
HAZ failure as the PCGTAW process resulted in the formation of a very
narrow UMZ region. In fact, there was also no evidence for the formation
of the HAZ, hence for the remote possibility of failure from the HAZ. This
is primarily due to the fact that the heat input to the weld pool is much
lower in the PCGTAW process compared with the common melting
methods.
As can be seen in Fig. 8b, the hardness profiles show an upward trend
from the BMs towards the WM. Indeed, the hardness variation in all
three regions is due to the variation of the microstructure, particularly of
the grain size. The higher hardness of the austenitic WM center is due to
the formation of a cohesive and very fine dendritic structure in this re­
gion compared to BMs. It is clear from the hardness profiles obtained in
this study that the WM of welded joint under the condition of Ib = 55A,
Ip = 150A has a lower hardness than the WM of the welded joint under
the condition ofIb = 85A, Ip = 110A. Two main parameters play critical
roles in defining the hardness of the WM joints. The first parameter is the
size of the dendrites formed in the austenite phase (the dominant phase
in the system; i.e. matrix). And the second parameter is the delta ferrite
formation within the austenite grains or on the austenite grain bound­
aries. As the amount of delta ferrite increases and the amount of
austenite decreases, the value of the WM hardness increases as such.
Therefore, the WM hardness is expected to increase with increasing the
amount of delta ferrite. On the other hand, reducing the size of the
dendrites and transforming columnar dendrites to the fine and coaxial
dendrites increase the hardness of the austenitic WM. In sum, both
mechanisms are at play to increase the hardness of the WM. It seems that
dendrite size-reduction plays a more important role as the main mech­
anism to increase the hardness of the WM. In a sense, it can be seen that
increasing Ib and decreasing Ip together with the continuous change of
the pulsed current of the PCGTAW process increased the hardness of the
WM in the dissimilar welded joints of AISI 310S - AISI 316L stainless
steels.
The results of the Charpy impact test was presented in Fig. 8c. As was
observed in this figure, with increasing Ib and decreasing Ip during the
PCGTAW process, the capability to absorb energy was increased in the
WM. The reason was, such a parametric variation transformed the
morphology of the dendrites from the columnar (and elongated) to the
coaxial feature (very fine) feature. As well, under such a circumstance
the distance between the dendrite arms was abruptly reduced in the
austenitic WM. This has led to a substantial increment in the toughness
and fracture energy of the welded joints at the point of failure. As such,
increasing Ib and decreasing Ip increased the number of grain boundaries
in the WM (as a result of reduced dendrites size). As grain boundaries are
high-energy locations in the microstructure, they act as strong barriers
against crack propagation. Under the condition of high volume grain
boundaries, the cracks have to consume a significant amount of energy
while crossing the boundaries. Indeed, the larger the grain boundaries
area or number, the more obstacles the cracks will face in passing
through the boundaries. Also, as the size of the dendrites in the WM
becomes smaller, the initial crack size decreases, leading to delayed
failure. Ultimately, the toughness of the WM of the welded joints sharply
increases. Overall, the results of the tensile, Charpy impact, and
microhardness tests are compatible with the microstructural evolution
explained in this study.
The fracture surface of the joints for both the tensile and the Charpy
impact tests (Figs. 9 and 10) showed that ductile fracture was the
dominant mode of fracture. This is due to the fact that austenite is the
predominant phase in the microstructure of both the WM and the BM of
the 316L stainless steel. And, austenite is a very soft phase in stainless
steels. Therefore, as a relatively large plastic deformation was applied
during the tensile test of the 316L stainless steel, the welded joints were
broken completely from the austenite phase. In a sense, it can be stated
that the ductile fracture mechanism, that is operational during the
uniaxial tensile test of the dissimilar joints of AISI 310S-AISI 316L
11
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
stainless steels, consists of three consecutive stages [48,49]:
(1) The first stage is the initiation of the cavities that is occurring at
the beginning of the heterogeneous plastic deformation.
(2) The second stage is the growth of the cavities, which leads to
plastic instability.
(3) The third stage is the joining of the cavities. This usually occurs at
a stress level higher than the yield strength and within the ho­
mogeneous plastic deformation region.
The final failure of the welded joints would occur with the connec­
tion of the grown cavities. This leads to the rupture of the dissimilar
welded joints of the AISI 310S-AISI 316L stainless steels with a dimple
characteristic. Fig. 8a shows the ductile fracture. Also, Fig. 8b shows the
connection stage of the cavities. And the final rupture is shown in
Fig. 8c. In fact, the stages explained above can be observed in Fig. 8.
Finally, such a fracture mechanism is reminiscent of a Cup & Cone
feature [50,51]. This mechanism is one of the most important fracture
mechanisms in the dissimilar welded joints of AISI 310S-AISI 316L
stainless steels.
5. Conclusions
In the present study, the effect of pulsed current parameters variation
during the PCGTAW process of the dissimilar welding of AISI 316L-AISI
310S stainless steels on microstructural evolution, mechanical proper­
ties changes, and fracture mode were investigated. Sheets of these two
alloys were welded by the PCGTAW technique under the condition of Ib
at 55, 70 and 85A, and Ip of 110, 130 and 150A. The welded joints were
evaluated by optical microscopy, FE-SEM, tensile test, Charpy impact
test and Vickers hardness test. Fracture surfaces analysis of the broken
samples for the tensile and Charpy impact tests was also analyzed. The
following conclusions can be drawn from conducting this study:
a) Microstructural analysis showed that the microstructure of AISI 316L
and AISI 310S stainless steels consisted of coaxial austenite grains
with small amounts of delta ferrite (stranded and stretched in the
rolling direction). However, the microstructure of the WM of the
joints was predominantly austenitic with islands of inter-dendritic
ferrite scattered within the dendritic branches.
b) The solidification of the WM for the AISI 316L-AISI 310S stainless
steels joints was austenitic-ferritic in the form of columnar and co­
axial dendrites. Increasing Ib and decreasing Ip during the PCGTAW
process changed the WM microstructure from columnar dendritic to,
the very fine dendritic, and coaxial feature. Such a situation also led
to a reduction in dendrite size as well as a reduction of the delta
ferrite grain boundaries in the austenitic WM. These reductions
increased microhardness and impact energy of the joint.
c) Assessing the interface microstructure of the dissimilar welded joints
of the AISI 316L-AISI 310S stainless steels showed that increasing Ib
and decreasing Ip reduced the width of the UMZ region.
d) Tensile test analysis indicated that the strength of the WM of the
welded joints was higher than the strength of the BMs of the
austenitic stainless steel. In fact, all the welded joints were broken
from the AISI 316L side during the tensile test. The values of the yield
strength, UTS and ductility for the welded joints were 183–203 MPa,
476–495 MPa and 40 ± 2%, respectively.
e) Hardness profiles of the BMs, UMZ and WM for the welded joints
showed that an upward trend exists from the BM side towards the
WM. It was observed that increasing Ib and decreasing Ip led to a
substantial increase in the hardness of the WM of the joint from
~270 ± 5 HV to ~318 ± 6 HV.
f) Charpy impact test results suggested that increasing Ib and
decreasing Ip, during the PCGTAW process of the dissimilar joint of
AISI 316L-AISI 310S stainless steels, led to a dramatic increase in the
fracture energy of the WM of the joints from 153 ± 4 J to 198 ± 3 J.
M. Sabzi et al.
g) Fracture surfaces studies of the Charpy impact and tensile tests
samples indicated that a fully ductile fracture characteristic has
prevailed.
Data availability statement
The raw/processed data required to reproduce these findings cannot
be shared at this time as the data also forms part of an ongoing study.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
M. Sabzi: Writing – original draft, Experimentation, Data collection,
Writing. S.H. Mousavi Anijdan: Methodology, Writing – review &a
editing, Writing, Reviewing, Supervision. A.R. Eivani: Writing – review
&a editing, Writing, Reviewing. N. Park: Reviewing. H.R. Jafarian:
Writing – original draft, Writing, Methodology.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] A. Zieliński, G. Golański, M. Sroka, Evolution of the microstructure and mechanical
properties of HR3C austenitic stainless steel after ageing for up to 30,000 h at
650–750 ◦ C, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 796 (2020) 139944.
[2] W. Chuaiphan, L. Srijaroenpramong, Microstructure, mechanical properties and
pitting corrosion of TIG weld joints alternative low-cost austenitic stainless steel
grade 216, Journal of Advanced Joining Processes 2 (2020) 100027.
[3] P. Sharma, D. Kumar Dwivedi, A-TIG welding of dissimilar P92 steel and 304H
austenitic stainless steel: mechanisms, microstructure and mechanical properties,
J. Manuf. Process. 44 (2019) 166–178.
[4] S.H. Mousavi Anijdan, M. Sabzi, M. Ghobeiti-Hasab, A. Roshan-Ghiyas,
Optimization of spot welding process parameters in dissimilar joint of dual phase
steel DP600 and AISI 304 stainless steel to achieve the highest level of shear-tensile
strength, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 726 (2018) 120–125.
[5] H. Lavvafi, M.E. Lewandowski, D. Schwam, J.J. Lewandowski, Effects of surface
laser treatments on microstructure, tension, and fatigue behavior of AISI 316LVM
biomedical wires, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 688 (2017) 101–113.
[6] M. Sanjari, A. Hadadzadeh, H. Pirgazi, A. Shahriari, B. Shalchi Amirkhiz, L.
A. Kestens, M. Mohammadi, Selective laser melted stainless steel CX: role of built
orientation on microstructure and micro-mechanical properties, Mater. Sci. Eng., A
786 (2020) 139365.
[7] D. Liang, J. Hure, A. Courcelle, S. ElShawish, B. Tanguy, A micromechanical
analysis of intergranular stress corrosion cracking of an irradiated austenitic
stainless steel, Acta Mater. 204 (2021) 116482.
[8] E. Paccou, B. Tanguy, M. Legros, Irradiation-assisted stress corrosion cracking
susceptibility and mechanical properties related to irradiation-induced
microstructures of 304L austenitic stainless steel, J. Nucl. Mater. 528 (2020)
151880.
[9] J. Zhang, Y. Huang, D. Fan, J. Zhao, J. Huang, Xi Yu, Sh Liu, Microstructure and
performances of dissimilar joints between 12Cr2Mo1R steel and 06Cr18Ni11Ti
austenitic stainless steel joined by AA-TIG welding, J. Manuf. Process. 60 (2020)
96–106.
[10] M. Sabzi, A. Kianpour-Barjoie, M. Ghobeiti-Hasab, S.M. Dezfuli, Effect of high-
frequency electric resistance welding (HF-ERW) parameters on metallurgical
transformations and tensile properties of API X52 microalloy steel welding joint,
Arch. Metall. Mater. 63 (2018) 1693–1699.
[11] X. Zhang, D. Li, Y. Li, Sh Lu, The influence of niobium on the plastic deformation
behaviors of 310s austenitic stainless steel weld metals at different temperatures,
Mater. Sci. Eng., A 743 (2019) 648–655.
[12] T. Nagira, D. Yamashita, M. Kamai, H. Liu, Y. Aoki, K. Uesugi, A. Takeuchi, H. Fujii,
In situ observation of solidification crack propagation for type 310S and 316L
stainless steels during TIG welding using synchrotron X-ray imaging, J. Mater. Sci.
56 (2021) 10653–10663.
[13] H. Vashishtha, R.V. Taiwade, S. Sharma, A.P. Patil, Effect of welding processes on
microstructural and mechanical properties of dissimilar weldments between
conventional austenitic and high nitrogen austenitic stainless steels, J. Manuf.
Process. 25 (2017) 49–59.
[14] S.D. Banik, S. Kumar, P.K. Singh, S. Bhattacharya, M.M. Mahapatra, Distortion and
residual stresses in thick plate weld joint of austenitic stainless steel: experiments
and analysis, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 289 (2021) 116944.
[15] M. Sabzi, S.M. Dezfuli, S.M. Far, Deposition of Ni-tungsten carbide nanocomposite
coating by TIG welding: characterization and control of microstructure and wear/
corrosion responses, Ceram. Int. 44 (18) (2018) 22816–22829.
12
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
[16] M. Arivarasu, D. Ramkumar Kasinath, A. Natarajan, Effect of continuous and
pulsed current on the metallurgical and mechanical properties of gas tungsten arc
welded AISI 4340 aeronautical and AISI 304 L austenitic stainless steel dissimilar
joints, Mater. Res. 18 (2015) 59–77.
[17] M. Vinoth Kumar, V. Balasubramanian, Effect of current pulsing on super 304HCu
weld joints, World Journal of Engineering 16 (2019) 814–822.
[18] A. Raveendra, B.V.R. Ravi Kumar, Experimental study on pulsed and NonPulsed
current TIG welding of stainless steel sheet (SS304), International Journal of
Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology 2 (2013) 2337–2344.
[19] A. Raveendra, B.V.R. Ravi Kumar, Experimental study on pulsed and non pulsed
current TIG welding of stainless steel sheet (SS304), International Journal of
Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology 2 (2013) 2337–2344.
[20] M. Abu-Aesh, M. Taha, A.S. El-Sabbagh, L. Dorn, Hot-cracking susceptibility of
fully austenitic stainless steel using pulsed-current gas tungsten arc-welding
process, Engineering Reports (2020) 1–13.
[21] S. Sharma, R. Vasantrao Taiwade, H. Vashishtha, Effect of pulsed current gas
tungsten arc process on the dissimilar weldments between nickel-based superalloy/
austenitic stainless steel, ISIJ Int. 57 (2017) 1080–1086.
[22] K. Devendranath Ramkumar, S.D. Patel, S.S. Praveen, D.J. Choudhury,
P. Prabaharan, N. Arivazhagan, M.A. Xavior, Influence of filler metals and welding
techniques on the structure–property relationships of Inconel 718 and AISI 316L
dissimilar weldments, Mater. Des. 62 (2014) 175–188.
[23] K. Devendranath Ramkumar, T.H. Mohan, R. Pandey, V. Saxena, S. Aravind,
Sh Singh, Investigations on the structure – property relationships of PCGTA welds
involving Inconel 718 and AISI 430, Ciência & Tecnologia dos Materiais 29 (2017)
28–38.
[24] V. Advaith, A. Vaisikan, S. Thirumalini, R. Padmanaban, M. Arivarasu, T.
R. Prabhu, Comparative studies on pulsed GTAW and AGTAW on dissimilar alloy
C-22 and AISI 316L weldments, Mater. Today: Proceedings 27 (2020) 2886–2895.
[25] M. Sanjari, A. Hadadzadeh, A. Shahriairi, S. Tamimi, H. Pirgazi, B. Shalchi
Amirkhiz, L. Kestens, M. Mohammadi, On the effect of building direction on the
microstructure and grain morphology of a selective laser melted maraging stainless
steel, in: TMS 2020 149th Annual Meeting & Exhibition Supplemental Proceedings,
2020, pp. 285–295.
[26] S.H.M. Anijdan, M. Sabzi, The evolution of microstructure of an high Ni HSLA
X100 forged steel slab by thermomechanical controlled processing, TMS Annual
Meeting & Exhibition (2018) 145–156.
[27] N. Karunakaran, Effect of pulsed current on temperature distribution, weld bead
profiles and characteristics of GTA welded stainless steel joints, Int. J. Eng.
Technol. 2 (2012) 1908–1916.
[28] K. DevendranathRamkumar, A. Choudhary, Sh Aggarwal, A. Srivastava, T. Harsha
Mohan, N. Arivazhagan, Characterization of microstructure and mechanical
properties of continuous and pulsed current gas tungsten arc welded
superaustenitic stainless steel, J. Mater. Res. 30 (2015) 1727–1746.
[29] Y. Meng, K. Kang, M. Gao, Xi Zeng, Microstructures and properties of single-pass
laser-arc hybrid welded stainless clad steel plate, J. Manuf. Process. 36 (2018)
293–300.
[30] A.L. Ramirez–Ledesma, L.A. Acosta–Vargas, J.A. Juarez–Islas, Suppression of
interdendritic segregation during welding of a 347 austenitic stainless steel pipe
reactors, Eng. Fail. Anal. 114 (2020) 104589.
[31] J.G. Thakare, Ch Pandey, M.M. Mahapatra, R.S. Mulik, An assessment for
mechanical and microstructure behavior of dissimilar material welded joint
between nuclear grade martensitic P91 and austenitic SS304 L steel, J. Manuf.
Process. 48 (2019) 249–259.
[32] M. Mukherjee, T. Kumar Pal, Evaluation of microstructural and mechanical
properties of Fe-16Cr-1Ni-9Mn-0.12N austenitic stainless steel welded joints,
Mater. Char. 131 (2017) 406–424.
[33] N. Bozzolo, M. Bernacki, Viewpoint on the formation and evolution of annealing
twins during thermomechanical processing of FCC metals and alloys, Metall.
Mater. Trans. 51 (2020) 2665–2684.
[34] H. Hyer, R. Newell, D. Matejczyk, S. Hsie, M. Anthony, L. Zhou, C. Kammerer,
Y. Sohn, Microstructural development in as built and heat treated IN625
component additively manufactured by laser powder bed fusion, J. Phase
Equilibria Diffus. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11669-020-00855-9.
[35] W. Tucho, V. Hansen, Studies of post heat treatment of L-PBF-inconel 718: effects
of hold time on microstructure, annealing twins and hardness, Preprints (2021)
1–20, https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202101.0124.v1.
[36] J.W. Sowards, D. Liang, B.T. Alexandrov, G.S. Frankel, J.C. Lippold, Solidification
behavior and weldability of dissimilar welds between a Cr-free, Ni-Cu welding
consumable and type 304L austenitic stainless steel, Metall. Mater. Trans. 43
(2012) 1209–1222.
[37] M. Sabzi, S. Mersagh Dezfuli, Drastic improvement in mechanical properties and
weldability of 316L stainless steel weld joints by using electromagnetic vibration
during GTAW process, J. Manuf. Process. 33 (2018) 74–85.
[38] J.W. Sowards, D. Liang, B.T. Alexandrov, G.S. Frankel, J.C. Lippold, A new
chromium-free welding consumablefor joining austenitic stainless steels, Weld. J.
90 (2011) 63–76.
[39] D. Rathod, S. Aravindan, P.K. Singh, S. Pandey, Metallurgical characterization and
diffusion studies of successively buttered deposit of Ni–Fe alloy and Inconel
onSA508 ferritic steel, ISIJ Int. 54 (2014) 1866–1875.
[40] S. Senthur Prabu, K. Devendranath Ramkumar, N. Arivazhagan, Microstructural
evolution and precipitation behavior in heat affected zone of Inconel 625 and AISI
904L dissimilar welds, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 263 (2017) 1–11.
[41] G. Chandrasekar, C. Kailasanathan, M. Vasundara, Investigation on un-peened and
laser shock peened dissimilar weldments ofInconel 600 and AISI 316L fabricated
using activated-TIG welding technique, J. Manuf. Process. 35 (2018) 466–478.
M. Sabzi et al.
[42] W. Kurz, C. Bezençon, M. Gaumann, Columnar to equiaxed transition in
solidification processing, Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 2 (2001) 185–191.
[43] R. Mohammed, G. Madhusudhan Reddy, K. Srinivasa Rao, Welding of nickel free
high nitrogen stainless steel: microstructure and mechanical properties, Defence
Technology 13 (2017) 59–71.
[44] A.V. Bansod, A.P. Patil, J. Vermac, S. Shukla, Microstructure, mechanical and
electrochemical evaluation of dissimilar low Ni SS and 304 SS using different filler
materials, Mater. Res. 22 (2019) 1–14.
[45] C. Roy, V.V. Pavanan, G. Vishnu, P.R. Hari, M. Arivarasu, M. Manikandan,
D. Ramkumar, N. Arivazhagan, Characterization of metallurgical and mechanical
properties of commercially pure copper and AISI 304 dissimilar weldments,
Procedia Materials Science 5 (2014) 2503–2512.
[46] W. Nawaz Khan, R. Chhibber, Effect of filler metal on solidification, microstructure
and mechanical properties of dissimilar super duplex/pipeline steel GTA weld,
Mater. Sci. Eng., A (2020) (Press).
[47] M. Fortan, A. Dejans, B. Karabulut, D. Debruyne, B. Rossi, On the strength of
stainless steel fillet welds, J. Constr. Steel Res. 170 (2020) 106081.
13
Materials Science & Engineering A 823 (2021) 141700
[48] M. Sabzi, S.M. Dezfuli, Post weld heat treatment of hypereutectoid hadfield steel:
characterization and control of microstructure, phase equilibrium, mechanical
properties and fracture mode of welding joint, J. Manuf. Process. 34 (2018)
313–328.
[49] HR Jafarian, M Sabzi, SH Mousavi Anijdan, AR Eivani, N Park, The influence of
austenitization temperature on microstructural developments, mechanical
properties, fracture mode and wear mechanism of Hadfield high manganese steel, J
ournal of Materials Research and Technology, Volume 10, 2021, 819-831.
[50] S.H. Mousavi Anijdan, M. Sabz, The effect of heat treatment process parameters on
mechanical properties, precipitation, fatigue life, and fracture mode of an
austenitic Mn hadfield steel, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 27 (10) (2018) 5246–5253.
[51] M. Sabzi, A. Obeydavi, S.H. Mousavi Anijdan, The effect of joint shape geometry on
the microstructural evolution, fracture toughness, and corrosion behavior of the
welded joints of a Hadfield steel, J. Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. 26 (2019)
1053–1063.